Background
Even though natural disasters and conflicts usually affect the entire population, people with disabilities are exposed to significantly higher risks than people without disabilities. The Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) 2015 to 2030 recognises this link between risks and disability and therefore calls for action.
Today, some progress has been made in translating SFDRR commitments into concrete action in several countries with the support of OPDs. Particularly pioneering in this regard is Bangladesh, which has already held two specific conferences on "Disability Inclusive Disaster Risk Management" in the wake of the Sendai Conference.
The adoption of the Humanitarian Inclusion Charta at the World Humanitarian Summit in 2016 was a major step forward in anchoring inclusion as a cross-cutting issue in humanitarian action. Based on this, since November 2019 and with the adoption of the IASC Guidelines on the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Humanitarian Action, there has been an important reference framework for the consideration of the topic by all humanitarian actors (especially UN agencies). In addition, the Humanitarian Inclusion Standards have been accepted as a SPHERE companion standard in 2019.
Under the framework of a joint consortium project on Disability Inclusive Disaster Risk Reduction (DiDRR) and Humanitarian Preparedness, Christoffel-Blindenmision Christian Blind Mission e.V. (CBM), Arbeiter-Samariter-Bund Deutschland e.V. (ASB), Malteser Hilfsdienst e.V. โ Malteser International Europa (MI), Centre for Disability in Development (CDD) and the International Disability Alliance (IDA) have been implemented activities at different levels (global, national and local) in across Asia, Africa and Central/ South America between May 2021 and October 2023.
The overall objective of the project is to contribute to a reduction of the disproportionate risk, to which persons with disabilities are exposed in the event of a disaster, by building and strengthening the capacity of relevant actors in the fields of humanitarian preparedness and humanitarian assistance, actively involving persons with disabilities. This overall objective is meant to be achieved through three different project outcomes:
- Global guidelines and standards in the field of disability-inclusive disaster risk reduction and humanitarian aid have been operationalized. Active participation of persons with disabilities in the relevant structures and coordination bodies at the global level has been increased. (Result 1)
- Staff and decision-makers of governmental and non-governmental disaster management agencies, as well as advocacy organizations of persons with disabilities (OPDs) in selected pilot countries, have acquired the technical knowledge to develop and implement inclusive humanitarian assistance and inclusive disaster preparedness systems. (Result 2)
- Innovative approaches to strengthening inclusive disaster risk reduction and humanitarian assistance planning and implementation capacities have been piloted in disaster-prone communities. (Result 3)
Evaluation Objective, Scope and Intended Use
Objective of the evaluation: Based on the implemented activities at global level and in the eight countries, the aim of the evaluation is to assess if planned outcomes (according to the project plan) of the project have been achieved. Furthermore, the evaluation shall also investigate on any unintended outcomes as well as the overall coordination of the project and alignment between the different result levels.
Scope of the study: The study shall focus on the activities implemented between May 2021 and October 2023 at global level and in the eight (8) countries in Africa, Asia and Central/ South America (namely Bangladesh, Myanmar, Indonesia, Niger, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Nicaragua and Colombia).
Audience and Intended use of the study:
- The target audience of the study report are the involved consortium partners and the German Federal Foreign Office (GFFO).
- Findings from this study will enable the project partners and GFFO to understand the outcomes and impact achieved under this project and remaining gaps and areas for improvement that could be covered under a potential 2nd phase of the project.
Guiding Questions
Relevance/Coherence:
- How relevant was the combined effort of working at different levels (globally, nationally, and locally)?
- Have activities at national and local level been implemented in a coherent way across the eight different countries?
- In how far have the related activities addressed the real needs of communities and of persons with disabilities in the specific context?
- How was the project connected with other global initiatives/working streams e.g., climate action, and humanitarian response, implementation of the IASC Guidelines on the inclusion of persons with disabilities in humanitarian action.
Effectiveness/ Impact:
- What has been the overall impact and outcome of the project in relation to planned targets and outcomes?
- What change is reported at the different levels of the project intervention (global, national, local)?
- Has the project contributed to a stronger uptake of disability inclusion in relevant processes at global level? (Result 1)
- Has the project contributed to more operationalised global guidelines and standards in the field of disability-inclusive disaster risk reduction and humanitarian aid and increased the active participation of persons with disabilities and their organizations in the relevant structures and coordination bodies at the global level? (Result 1)
- Have national stakeholders (government, civil society organisations, UN agencies, umbrella OPDs) that have been trained through the project increased their knowledge on disability inclusion? (Result 2)
- To which extent are the trained stakeholders showing a concrete application of their acquired knowledge? (Result 2)
- Can the target population at community level be considered better prepared for practicing sustainable disability inclusion in DRR and humanitarian preparedness? (Result 3)
- Which innovative approaches to strengthening capacity for planning and implementing inclusive DRR and humanitarian assistance in disaster-prone communities in selected target countries have been piloted through the project and what was their impact? (Result 3)
Efficiency:
- Were the objectives achieved within the planned timeframe?
- How well have resources been planned and used for the project?
- Have funds been used in an efficient way?
- How well was funding balanced between the different levels (global, national local)?
- How well has the project been managed and governed?
Sustainability:
- Is there a clear institutional commitment from (national and/or local) government and other key stakeholders (civil society organisations, OPDs, UN agencies) for disability inclusion in DRR and humanitarian preparedness?
- Have the targeted communities (under Result 3) in the eight countries created an ownership for practicing disability inclusion in DRR and humanitarian preparedness?
- Is the project approach replicable in other countries?
- Is there lessons learned and recommendations to be considered for a potential 2nd phase of the consortium?
Active participation of Persons with Disabilities/ OPDs:
- How and to what extend have persons with disabilities been empowered through the project (at the various levels)?
- What evidence demonstrated that the OPDs will (be able to) continue their engagement in relevant processes at global, national and local level after the project?
- Have men and women been equally involved in the various activities of the project (incl. caretakers of children with disabilities)?
- Have persons with different types of impairments been well represented/included in the various activities of the project?
Methodology
The evaluation team will develop the detailed methodology and tools in collaboration with CBM and the project partners. A mixed methods approach is expected that includes a desk review of reports, activity-specific evaluation reports/ documentations, case studies, training reports, etc. as well as remote/digital interaction (through KII and FGDs) with main stakeholders incl. persons with disabilities and Organisations of Persons with Disabilities (OPDs).
The evaluation team is expected to submit an evaluation plan/inception report which will provide details of the methodology shortly after commencement of the evaluation.
Limitations
Due to the nature of the project, it is planned to carry out the evaluation remotely (desk-based) without travel to the countries of implementation. All documents are available in digital form only.
Expected Results
- An inception report of maximum 20 pages outlining the detailed methodology and parameters for the synthesis.
- A final report (around 30 to 35 pages) containing analytical elements related to the issues specified in this ToR. The report shall contain an executive summary that can be used as stand-alone document for further distribution, and a main text with clear and concise findings.
- A PowerPoint presentation that summarizes the key findings (for potential external communication) to be presented to key staff of the consortium.
All documents to be provided in an accessible format in English.
Management Responsibilities and Evaluation Team
CBM as the commission entity has the responsibility for:
- Overall oversight of the evaluation process.
- Acting as a focal person for the evaluator(s).
- Establishing contacts between evaluators and the consortium partners.
- Contractual management and payments.
- Provide technical support to finalize evaluation tools, inception report and final report of the evaluation.
Consortium partners (IDA, ASB, MI, CDD) have the responsibility for:
- Providing selected project/ activity documentation.
- Availability for qualitative interviews as agreed within the methodology.
- Provide technical support to finalize evaluation tools, inception report and final report of the evaluation.
Evaluation Team is responsible for:
- Delivery of expected results
- Ensuring adherence to CBM Code of Conduct and Child and Adults At Risk Policy.
- Ensuring adherence to highest standard of data security during the evaluation and afterwards.
- Ensuring compliance with CRPD values and principles including rights-based approach to disability
Consultant (Team) Profile
- Academic degree preferably in Development Studies/ Disability inclusion/ any other related subjects.
- At least 5 years of work experience in Humanitarian Action/ Disaster Risk Reduction and/or Disability Inclusion (programme design, implementation and/or assessment)
- At least 4 years of work experience with similar research projects
- Strong analytical, communication and report writing skills
- Fluent in English in speaking and writing is a key requirement; knowledge of Spanish and/or French is of added value
- Working independently and pro-actively seeking information, while remaining culturally sensitive
- Persons with disabilities are strongly encouraged to apply.
Each team member, incl. interpreters, enumerators etc need to fully comply with and sign CBMโs or the partner organisationโs Code of Conduct and Safeguarding Policy as well as commitment to data security and privacy.
Documents provided after contract signature
- Project proposal documents (incl. logframe, budget plan etc.)
- Annual/ Interim Reports
- Annual & Interim Reports of the country teams
- Annual report to donors (narrative & financial; Milestones)
- Mid-Term Review Report
- Activity specific reports and documentation
- Assessment reports of specific activities